> On 25 Oct 1999, Anders Sandberg wrote:> > > (Antisocial personality disorder actually seems to be the most biologically> > well-defined personality disorder).> > Sure, you could postulate a faulty gene or two in the "face/emotion"> recognition circuits and have a person that simply cannot "read"> other people and is therefore insensitive to them. Doesn't take> much to go from that to "antisocial" or sociopath.

Actually, I would look for genes dealing with the connection frontal
lobes - limbic system, like for example the medial forebrain
bundle. But I would expect antisocial personality disorder to be
multifactorial. The face/emotion recognition problem could be shared
with (say) Asperger's Syndrome.

> > Some are likely easier to treat than others, but the main> > problem is of course that if you have a less-than-optimal personality> > you may not realise it is bad for you ("I'm all right, it is everybody> > else who are idiots!").> > Or we (as a society) may not be organized to deal with the non-norms> since our structures are organized for the "norm".

This is largely true, but I guess ASPD would be a handicap even in
more broad-minded societies. It is IMHO more of a cognitive deficiency
than a social one, although it is largely expressed through
dysfunctional social behavior.

An amusing take on this appeared in my sf scenario, where people who
by current standards are sociopaths hold respected positions in the
libertarian society on the planet Atlantis. As long as you know that
you are dealing with a sociopath, have a society where it is harder
for individuals to be coercive and can treat the worst cognitive
problems it is not a major disadvantage (just make sure the contracts
are binding). But this is after all science fiction. (Coming to a web
near you - but I think I might have to censor some ideas, I have
to write up papers on them first :-)

> > Usually people get treated for antisocial personality disorder because> > they got caught after some crime - *they* don't consider themselves> > sick in any way. There are likely plenty of antisocial people out> > there who are not ill enough to get forced into treatment but remain> > ill enough to mess up their own and others lives.> > Yes, and its going to be very interesting when we start to uncover> the polymorphisms in those genes and unravel their contributions> to "mal-adjustment". ... Hey!, I'm not a mal-adjusted sociopathic> little twerp, I'm just "being" me!

This is actually a deep transhumanist dilemma. On one hand we want
morphological freedom, including the freedom to redefine our minds far
beyond what is currently human. On the other hand, we acknowledge the
risks of getting stuck in bad, irrational attractors that are not just
subjectively bad but also have objective bad effects on the person,
such as being an antisocial twerp. How to set up an infrastructure
that enables us to augment ourselves and have personal freedom, but
still limit the risks of getting trapped into bad personality states
that we might (when having them) not want to leave? Maybe
self-augmenting people should participate in some kind of peer group
to be reviewed?

I'm reminded of one of Harry Harrison's stainless steel rat novels
where the protagonist takes a sociopathy-inducing drug to find out
what his enemy is going to do, and then of course don't want to change
back. Fortunately he had hidden a sleep grenade under the drug bottle
and then erased the memory of doing so...